4 ms·
May as well just bundle SQLite while you're at it.
by ZitchDog 9y ago
May as well just bundle SQLite while you're at it.
- foldr 9y agoHmm? I mean sure, but the point is that adding a few kb of text to the file is a more lightweight solution. Less than the overhead of using xml, probably.
- falcolas 9y agoLower overhead today, but in the original context, it's still a greater overhead if/when SQLite is no longer active. At that point, you have to write a binary parser just to get back the RDBMS, at which point you have to reverse-engineer how the tables were built in order to re-create the document. An interesting read on the topic and challenges of digital preservation: http://www.dl.slis.tsukuba.ac.jp/DLjournal/No_20/1-hedstrom/1-hedstrom.html http://www.dl.slis.tsukuba.ac.jp/DLjournal/No_20/1-hedstrom/...
- foldr 9y agoThe SQLite binary format is simple and well-documented, so writing a binary parser would be a pretty straightforward exercise. >at which point you have to reverse-engineer how the tables were built in order to re-create the document. I don't understand what you mean by this. All you have to do is examine the contents of the various tables. It's no different to examining the contents of an XML file. In either case, how easy it is to reconstruct the document will depend on how well designed the format is.